Download PDFPDF
Trials in rheumatoid arthritis: choosing the right outcome measure when minimal disease is achievable
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests


  • Responses are moderated before posting and publication is at the absolute discretion of BMJ, however they are not peer-reviewed
  • Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. Removal or editing of responses is at BMJ's absolute discretion
  • If patients could recognise themselves, or anyone else could recognise a patient from your description, please obtain the patient's written consent to publication and send them to the editorial office before submitting your response [Patient consent forms]
  • By submitting this response you are agreeing to our full [Response terms and requirements]

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Trials in RA: choosing the right outcome measure

    Dear Editor,

    Felson et al make a good case for choosing continuous, rather than dichotomous, variables as the primary outcome measures in randomised controlled trials in rheumatoid arthritis but outcome measure also need to be meaningful to the clinical community. In TICORA we chose two ‘co-primary’ end-points: firstly, we employed the mean change in DAS because this was the most sensitive outcome measure available at...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.